since a few months, each time I try to download a package (either an update for already installed package, or a not yet installed package), I got an error message reporting that Synaptic cannot access the required RPMs on the BLAG60001 server ("Forbidden , You don't have permission to access /90000/iso/BLAG-90001-i386.iso on this server" is the message I got when using Firefox. A similar message is reported by Synaptic) . You said that Synaptic was busted, replying to a BLAG 90001 user. Is it the same for all the older versions of BLAG (I'm running 60001 since July 2007 ) ? What's the reason behind that nasty situation ? Blag servers (http, ftp) were brought down ? I think that Synaptic is using http for downloading the packages elected by the machine administrator.
As far as I am concerned, Synaptic is more convenient that "yum" or "rpm". I've always used "rpm -i / -e" only for packages not available on blag server.
Eric.

The main developer and owner of the BLAG servers (jebba) is no longer involved with the project. This caused basically the loss of all of the BLAG ftp world. The BLAG team has restored functionality to the BLAG 90K series, and that is the only one that will be up for the foreseeable future (till a new edition of BLAG is produced)

70K still rates as my favorite version of BLAG.. brings a tear to my eye when I remember over righting it on my laptop and main machine

Thanks for your answer.
I did tried last year to upgrade my 60K towards 70K : a total failure which lead me to re-install from scratch 60K. As I don't want to loose all the custommization I made so far, I don't intend to upgrade towards 90K or 10K, even if it would allow me to install newer versions of some of my favourite s/w (such as GRAMPS, a genealogical s/w).

Thanks for your answer.I did tried last year to upgrade my 60K towards 70K : a total failure which lead me to re-install from scratch 60K. As I don't want to loose all the custommization I made so far, I don't intend to upgrade towards 90K or 10K...

i can certainly understand this line of thinking, but i do worry about security updates. 60k is based on fc6, and 70k on fc7: both of these are dead from a fedora point of view. do you connect these machines to the internet? what if the recent, well-publicized bug in debian openssl had been a fedora bug instead? the newer updated firefox et al don't just have feature updates, but security updates too. i'll stop there as i don't want to labour the point, but you get the point.

i would be interested to know the nature of customization that is not transferable to a newer, safer release of blag.

i can certainly understand this line of thinking, but i do worry about security updates. 60k is based on fc6, and 70k on fc7: both of these are dead from a fedora point of view. do you connect these machines to the internet? what if the recent, well-publicized bug in debian openssl had been a fedora bug instead? the newer updated firefox et al don't just have feature updates, but security updates too. i'll stop there as i don't want to labour the point, but you get the point.

i would be interested to know the nature of customization that is not transferable to a newer, safer release of blag.[/quote]

I've had to fight to make some of my MacBookPro hardware working : the sound card, the iSight webcam, apple hot keys.

In *theory* one could update a BLAG 60K to a fairly secure state by using updates found for CentOS 5, (which is also based on Fedora 6) and EPEL 5 from Fedora, and that should be fairly compatible, besides the kernel. I wouldn't be able to tell you which kernel to use.

My "plan" originally was to see how easy it would be to update 30K and 60K using CentOS and other repos. This plan is scrapped since the BLAG repos for these are gone and their are now more pressing matters. Not that I would have gotten off my butt on the original project. Necessity breeds invention, and updating my 30K laptop and my 60K workstation feels a lot less necessary than helping to keep BLAG a live.

i would be interested to know the nature of customization that is not transferable to a newer, safer release of blag.

ririkourou94 wrote:

I've had to fight to make some of my MacBookPro hardware working : the sound card, the iSight webcam, apple hot keys.

i could see that might be problematic, but i'm sure there are other users facing the same problems, free software is about sharing knowledge and skills; my experience of gnu/linux is that most folks are willing to share. though, i'm sure you already know that ;-)

r7 wrote:

i can certainly understand this line of thinking, but i do worry about security updates. 60k is based on fc6, and 70k on fc7: both of these are dead from a fedora point of view. do you connect these machines to the internet? what if the recent, well-publicized bug in debian openssl had been a fedora bug instead? the newer updated firefox et al don't just have feature updates, but security updates too. i'll stop there as i don't want to labour the point, but you get the point.

however you've not answered this question. i certainly don't mean to tell you what to do [it's your box]. for me, the security upgrade issue is more important and the customization a necessary pain. i feel that pain as upgrading to 70k and 90k broke my wireless badly both times, jebba spent hours trying to work out what was going on...

Please note that I'm using 2.6.25.9 kernel since a few months which is a quite recent kernel release (at least much more recent that the 2.6.20-1 version shipped with Blag 60K). I'm used to download new kernels and then to recompile it to get a more secured kernel.
I also have OpenMotif, PostGresql, Mysql versions which may not be supported by FC9/10, and that are mandatory to operate a professional application.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum